No, it really doesn't.

Show me

Quote from: Imperial Apologist on January 15, 2016, 04:28:39 AM

No, it really doesn't.

Show me

meta's probably gonna have the data, but the main argument you'll see against "free college" is that it "devalues" the college degree--it's no longer a feather in your cap, because everyone would just be able to go to college, get a degree in whatever they want, and they wouldn't have to pay a dime for their tuition

this, in turn, according to them, will "inflate" the job market

which isn't actually a REAL problem, but conservatives like to pretend it is, because apparently having a nation full of educated people is... very bad, because, uh... you can't... brainwash people into voting republican, or something

meta's alternative, if you can't pay off your debt, is to give students the right to file bankruptcy over their student loans, because you are currently unable to do that for some ungodly reason

Oh.

I mean, call me stupid, but I feel like education is, like, more important.

There are very few things you can tell me that will convince me making sure everybody receives a good opportunity to be educated is a bad idea. But again, this is far from my area of expertise, and I'm sure Meta's gonna throw a bunch of rhetoric at me that's gonna fly over my head because I don't know shit about the complexities of university education and however the hell it fits into politics or economics.

you'll also hear pretty often from these people that college, or any higher education, is not necessarily required for you to have a career--when, of course, it basically is

i mean, the highest paying jobs in this country that you do not need a college degree for are all extremely dangerous (like working in oil fields), and... that's pretty much what you got

it's either that, or working in the evil, scumfuck, dead-end food industry

so, personally, i wouldn't call it a choice--you need a college degree

Quote from: Dean "Turkey" Strang on January 15, 2016, 11:54:29 AM

Yes, you can.

i'm just going by what meta has told me, unless i misquoted him, in which case, my b

Oh, yeah. Well he's wrong in that instance. Approximately 40% of people that include student loans in their bankruptcy get a partial or complete discharge.

Quote from: Dean "Turkey" Strang on January 15, 2016, 11:59:23 AM

Oh, yeah. Well he's wrong in that instance. Approximately 40% of people that include student loans in their bankruptcy get a partial or complete discharge.

only 40%?

so 60% were comfortable with paying it off themselves or what

that seems hard to believe

It has to be demonstrated that the minimum payment presents an insurmountable hardship on the loanee. Bankruptcy isn't just a free reset button.

It has to be demonstrated that the minimum payment presents an insurmountable hardship on the loanee. Bankruptcy isn't just a free reset button.

fair enough

that does make the 40% seem a hell of a lot bigger--"insurmountable hardship"

Quote

Plan:
Paid Family and Medical Leave: Sen. Sanders has proposed at least 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave to all workers.

Payment:
Paid for by a payroll tax that would total $1.61 a week for the typical American worker. According to Sen. Gillibrand’s office, this would be “a self-sufficient program that would not add to the federal budget.”

Cost:
Revenue: $319 billion/10y

Quote

For example, the average woman worker earning the median weekly wage would only need to contribute $1.38 per week (for a total of $72.04 per year) into the program, and even the highest wage earners would have a maximum contribution of $4.36 per week, or $227.40 per year. This means that for less than ONE tall brewed Starbucks coffee ($1.85) or about the cost of ONE venti latte per week (over $4) we could create a program that will be so beneficial for our families. The average full time working woman earning the median weekly wage would receive a total of $5,514.48 if she took the full 12 weeks of paid leave.

"And fuck you if you decide to not have kids and thus never use this leave. Pay for it anyway."

The fact that they use lattes and Starbucks to explain basic math to their supporters just shows the idiocy that is supporting the socialist "democrat".

The average Sanders supporter:

I mean, call me stupid, but I feel like education is, like, more important.

False dichotomy. The argument has nothing to do with a society's general level of education, which everybody agrees ought to be increasing, but with how the tertiary level interacts with the other levels.

The entire point of university degrees is to act as signallers for a certain skillset. If almost everybody has a degree, employers will begin to demand them just because they can. Which ultimately just hurts the least educated in terms of employment.

Isn't the entire point of free tuition to minimize the unemployment of the "Least educated" by offering school to everyone?

Ostemsibly, but evidence from both Scotland and Germany suggests that such policies disproportionately benefit the middle-class, not the working-class.

I don't understand what you mean by employers will just begin to demand them "Because they can."

Employers will do so in a labour market of which is saturated with higher education.

Quote from: Winy on January 15, 2016, 10:09:04 PM

Quote

Employers will do so in a labour market of which is saturated with higher education.

That's a bad thing?

More jobs for everyone?

No, that means no jobs for people without degrees.

...But wouldn't a much larger number of people have degrees in a country with free tuition?

Quote from: Winy on January 15, 2016, 10:12:29 PM

Quote from: † on January 15, 2016, 10:11:16 PM

Quote from: Winy on January 15, 2016, 10:09:04 PM

Quote

Employers will do so in a labour market of which is saturated with higher education.

That's a bad thing?

More jobs for everyone?

No, that means no jobs for people without degrees.

...But wouldn't a much larger number of people have degrees in a country with free tuition?

Yes.

You seem confused here. More people with degrees does not mean more jobs for them. More people with degrees means more people competing for those jobs that already required degrees, and the potential for degrees to become the new minimum for entry in fields that were previously accessible without them.

I am confused- I'm very ignorant about how all of this works, I just want everybody to receive a good education, because I believe everyone is entitled to accessible knowledge.

But in regards to what you said, I'm not sure I understand how that's a bad thing. Now you have a bunch more people educated- albeit the minimum threshold for certain positions and requirements has risen. Doesn't that just mean that things are still going to be better for everyone overall, but the mechanics of how education relates to employment has just sort of "Elevated?"